Archive for May, 2009

Slander of Title and Foreclosure Defense

Tuesday, May 26th, 2009
Bookmark and Share

Various news services over the weekend reported that the number of foreclosures in Florida will increase – primarily due to the deteriorating job market.  Now not only will sub-prime borrowers continue to get foreclosed, but average borrowers, who had good credit (or so-called prime borrowers) are now being foreclosed. Unfortunately, many of these homeowners are losing their income and even when jobs get replaced, the new job is usually lower-paying and will not support the mortgage payment.

So it is in that scenario that we are glad when a foreclosure mill has to pay us our legal fees in a wrongful foreclosure case such as in the situation below.

The Florida Wrongful Foreclosure Defense Case
The facts were simple. The bank sued the wrong condo unit owner. Our client had been making all his payments yet somehow the bank and their counsel sued the wrong condo-owner. They slapped a lien on the wrong unit and that is where they crossed the line. The legal name for this situation is slander of title! Well when the bank’s counsel learned of their error, we were more than gracious to settle quickly and get the lien released and, yes… get our fees paid.

It’s a small victory… but when confronted with the long odds we face each day… yes we take professional pride in these small victories. It’s like David and Goliath. We are David representing all the average folks while the billion and trillion dollar banks are Goliath… literally. We truly believe the banks caused this crisis that has affected the whole economy. They knew or should have known that paying originators to effectively lie and cheat as long as they provided a live borrower who could make one monthly mortgage payment would ultimately spell disaster.

Interestingly, however, while some bankers will lose their jobs… they will not lose their homes or credit for what they engineered. It is the average family who they will try and destroy. So that is why we continue to defend and counsel these average Americans every day… and salver the small victories. Our foreclosure defense firm has developed numerous methods to help people who are about to venture into an area they never thought they would be. We give them hope, confidence, and the ability to get on with their lives without ever missing a beat!

Statewide Solutions for Florida Foreclosures?

Wednesday, May 13th, 2009
Bookmark and Share

Today’s Daily Business Review includes Roy Oppenheim discussing the possible Florida Supreme Court task force to regulate the process of foreclosure.  Read on for the full story.


dbr_logo_print_media_events

Florida Supreme Court
Task force hopes to standardize management of excessive foreclosures

Florida Supreme Court task force on home foreclosures plans to propose uniform case management and design a model mediation program to deal with the glut of foreclosure cases tying up the state’s legal system.

In an interim report released this week, the task force said uniform statewide solutions are needed “to avoid a patchwork of independent and confusing requirements.” But the task force is short on details, making it difficult for those working on foreclosure cases to comment on the proposals.

“At this point, it’s a little uncertain how things are going to proceed other than we expect some time in August to have a final recommendation from this task force,” said Fort Lauderdale attorney Eric Schwartz, who represents licensed mortgage lenders.

The 14-page report plus attachments notes the obvious: mortgage foreclosure filings have exploded. In three years, state courts have seen filings increase by 400 percent, and Florida has the fourth highest foreclosure rate nationally.

But instead of receiving increased infrastructure or funding, the court system has suffered cutbacks as the economy plummeted, and judges are juggling a backlog.

Supreme Court Justice Barbara Pariente said the court must try to balance the interests of lenders and borrowers when drafting a plan, and she emphasized the need for statewide standards.

Pariente, who had not seen the report when she was interviewed, said she does not know what the answer is but knows it’s important that the process be efficient and guarantee each borrower who wants a day in court can have one.

She also knows task force recommendations won’t make everyone happy.

“We’re studying it. We hope to be proactive to create a statewide order,” Pariente said.

The 15-member task force chaired by Miami-Dade Civil Administrative Judge Jennifer Bailey voted to design an alternative dispute resolution program for foreclosures that would be considered by the state’s high court. The program would be limited to cases filed in court because judges lack jurisdiction over other disputes.

The task force plans to offer recommendations that would be cost-effective and affordable while staying consistent with existing laws and policies. A pending issue is the “clarification of legal and ethical obligations of circuit judges in hearing uncontested securitized mortgage foreclosure cases.”

Homeowner defense attorney Roy Oppenheim of Oppenheim Pilelsky in Weston seized on that point, claiming the constitutional rights of distressed homeowners may be sacrificed at the hands of overworked judges.

“Why do we need clarifications if judges are really, really doing their jobs?” he asked. “It’s saying in a nice way that judges are not fulfilling constitutional obligations to protect those people not represented by counsel.”

On Sunday, the Sarasota Herald-Tribune reported foreclosure lawyers for lenders are giving false statements in court and the lies and errors are slipping past overworked judges.

The task force created nearly two months ago by Chief Justice Peggy Quince to assess whether the court system could find more efficient ways to handle foreclosures plans to deliver a final report Aug. 15.

Bailey said the goals of case management and alternative dispute resolution are to ensure cases that can settle do so early to avoid clogging courthouses.

Bailey compared the court system to a highway running at maximum capacity.

“With foreclosure cases, it’s like that highway during a hurricane evacuation in a rainstorm with two lanes closed for construction because of the budget cuts that have affected the court system,” she said. “Our job is to create off-ramps for those cases … and try to keep the traffic moving because it’s not just affecting foreclosure cases. It’s affecting every case filed.”

Whether mediation would be mandatory or case specific is still being debated. Miami-Dade County opted for mandatory mediation last month after a circuit court in the Florida Panhandle did the same.

Bailey said the task force is developing criteria for what would be subject to alternative dispute resolution.

The task force also is trying to determine where the court process breaks down and how to better move cases. It could propose administrative orders and forms to use statewide.

The biggest complaint is a lack of communication between the two sides, Bailey said. The task force intends to provide the circuits with a uniform set of forms that also would give circuits flexibility.

“Coming up with one static plan that doesn’t allow for any ingenuity would be unintelligent,” Bailey said. “The idea is to come up with a basic plan that we would build on that’s relatively uniform throughout the state.”

The task force is soliciting public input but won’t hold any public hearings because of time and budget constraints.

Oppenheim called the lack of public hearings “garbage.”

“It’s the biggest problem to hit Florida in 50 years, and they’re not going to have public meetings,” he said incredulously.

If mandatory mediation is recommended, Oppenheim said he would want lenders to pay for it to ensure everyone has their day in court.

“I really get a sense that our judicial system has become a gigantic collection agency for the banks,” he said. “There definitely needs to be some creativity and some oversight here.”

Schwartz of Weitz & Schwartz in Fort Lauderdale would be happy to see uniformity among circuit courts, saying the hodgepodge of administrative orders around the state makes it difficult for practitioners who work in a variety of jurisdictions.

But he wants mediation to be addressed on a case-by-case basis.

“It takes two to tango, and oftentimes we have files where the defendants are totally unresponsive and are not living at the property any longer,” Schwartz said. “To have [mediation] applied in those types of circumstances would be a waste of everyone’s time and money.”

He advocates having procedures in place allowing parties to request mediation. He opposes Miami-Dade Circuit Court’s policy requiring lenders who file homestead residential foreclosure actions to pay $750 to the Tallahassee-based Collins Center for Public Policy for mediation in addition to foreclosure filing fees.

In a speech last Friday in Fort Lauderdale, Pariente worried the public would stop “seeing courts as protectors but facilitators for the powerful.”

Bailey said the task force is trying to put together the best system for what is “fundamentally a problem that extends so far beyond what the court system is designed to respond to. There are community stabilization issues, huge economic issues, homelessness issues, job issues, mortgage fraud issues, bank regulatory issues, most of which is outside our control. We’re just where the buck stops,” Bailey said.

“The really hard work is now ahead,” Schwartz acknowledged.

Jordana Mishory can be reached at (954) 468-2616.

Loan Auditors and Foreclosure Defense: The Real Story

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009
Bookmark and Share

The Daily Business Review’s Terry Sheridan called Oppenheim Law to talk about how loan auditors are becoming a hot commodity in helping homeowners with today’s foreclosure maze.  

Here is the full story as seen in the May 5th issue of the Daily Business Review.

logo

Loan auditors review contracts for mistakes, but critics question usefulness
A mid growing efforts to help home owners avoid foreclosure, loan auditors are elbowing for a seat at the table.

Attorneys and home owners hire the companies for $500 to $1,000 to comb through mortgage documents for questionable disclosures or improper fees that could be used to delay or prevent foreclosure. And some loan auditors say they will trace ownership of a loan note. The document is critical, because without that paper trail, a lender can’t foreclose.

“They are the latest cottage industry to spring up because of the housing and financial downturn,” said real estate and foreclosure attorney Roy Oppenheim of Oppenheim Pilelsky in Weston.

How many auditors exist isn’t certain, and the companies aren’t licensed or regulated. As for their services, no one seems able to agree on how useful audits are.

Oppenheim says at some time he may use an auditor. But for now, his clients don’t want to spend the money.

“We get hired to handle a foreclosure, not a counterclaim against a bank,” he said.

On the other hand, foreclosure defense attorney Peter Ticktin of the Ticktin Law Group in Deerfield Beach said he believes fighting the banks on behalf of his clients is exactly why auditors are essential.

Ticktin set up Florida Mortgage Auditing about nine months ago. Audits of loan documents in about 1,000 foreclosure cases since then have revealed problems in almost all of them, he said.

The ultimate proof that the audits are successful will come in stopping the foreclosures. That hasn’t happened yet but lenders have been required to substantiate fees and the investigations have resulted in other findings. Several of the cases are being litigated and are currently in discovery. That’s a sign of progress, Ticktin said. “We haven’t lost yet.”

But attorney George Castrataro in Wilton Manors said he has yet to find an auditing company that doesn’t have what he believes is a conflict of interest by being involved with attorneys or real estate companies. So he’s hired mortgage brokers to review about 20 to 30 loans so far.

Ticktin says Castrataro is “being silly.”

Ticktin has a liaison to the auditing firm within his offices but the actual auditors are outside the office.

He says if the loan auditors worked for the bank, that would be a conflict of interest. But the loan auditors are rendering a legal service to Ticktin and giving him the legal information he needs to oppose a motion for summary judgment or otherwise pursue a case.

But loan auditors who deal directly with the public are practicing law without a license, Ticktin says.

Lender Tim Frederick, president of the Mortgage Bankers Association of the Gold Coast in West Palm Beach, described loan auditing companies as a “new gimmick” that can be construed as helping people but that also capitalizes on the financial crisis.

Some auditors stretch claims of how effective they are, Oppenheim said. Some contend they track ownership of a mortgage note through the complex securitization process –– something a lawyer would do through court-ordered discovery.

And auditors have been involved with loan modification companies that illegally charge upfront fees in attempts to prevent foreclosure, he said.

Auditors fall under the definition of “foreclosure-related rescue services” and, if fees are demanded upfront, can be sued by the state under the state’s Foreclosure Rescue Fraud Prevention Act.

A Florida Bar spokeswoman said loan auditing companies had not yet emerged as a concern. But the Bar has posted an ethics alert about loan modification companies, which often work with loan auditors.

The alert warns lawyers that they can’t provide legal services for a homeowner while working as in-house counsel for a non-lawyer company, pay referral fees to non-lawyers, divide fees with a non-lawyer or be paid by a non-lawyer for services to distressed home owners.

In March, state Attorney General Bill McCollum sued Lincoln Lending Services in Miami-Dade Circuit Court for violations of the law.

According to the lawsuit, Lincoln Lending allegedly charged $2,700 for a forensic analysis to determine errors or fraud in customers’ original mortgage or closing documents. The company would charge a second fee of $999 to modify loans.

Loan auditors are “definitely a subject on our radar screen,” said Sandi Copes, McCollum’s spokeswoman in Tallahassee.

A call to Lincoln Lending was not returned.

And for good reason, said loan auditor Steve Dibert, president of MFI-Miami and MFI-Mod Squad in Boynton Beach.

“I have about 50 competitors in Florida but that’s like comparing a Ferrari to a Ford Pinto,” he said. “A lot of these [auditing] firms want to mass produce so they use automated [software] systems that are about 70 percent accurate.”

At US Lender Audit in Tampa, business development director Shawn Aaron said auditors seeking quick business growth are promoting the use of the software programs.

The programs may flag problems based on lending laws that didn’t exist when a loan was made, Aaron said.

“You can hire a layman to punch in ‘yes’ and ‘no’ and some numbers. And in 20 minutes, they spit out a report,” he said.

It’s critical that auditors also know the source of documents given them to analyze, he said. A home owner’s loan paperwork won’t be as complete as the lender’s. And even a lender’s documents must be examined to ensure they’ve complied with a lawyer’s discovery request and that everything is legible.

“If you’re getting faxed copies that are illegible, that’s not a real interpretation of what the lender or servicer has on file,” Aaron said.

Getting documents from lenders is at the heart of MFI-Miami’s work.

Since January, Dibert has launched investigations involving Wachovia, Hudson City Savings Bank in New York and more than a dozen loan modification companies.

In the Wachovia news release, Dibert said the bank tried to block MFI’s fraud investigations and refuses to provide home owners with copies of their loan-closing documents.

Many of the loans Dibert is analyzing were done as adjustable-rate mortgages that Wachovia acquired when it purchased World Savings Bank.

A Wachovia spokeswoman said the bank would have no comment about MFI’s allegations.

But audits alone aren’t likely to stop foreclosures, Oppenheim said.

“One out of 20 times you have a situation where an audit is appropriate,” he said. “And if [owners] haven’t made payments, they haven’t made payments.”

Nicki Struthers of Bradenton, one of Dibert’s first customers, said she waited too long and the audit was of no help.

Though Dibert found several loan violations that included a double charge for an appraisal, Struthers hesitated to pay for an attorney. When she finally consulted one, there was little that could be done. In January, Struthers lost her house in foreclosure.

“In my position, the audit didn’t do a lot for me,” she said. “But if I hadn’t waited until the final hour, that would have been a big hammer to swing at a lender.”

That hammer depends on more than timing, said foreclosure attorney Castrataro, who recently opened a law office in Wilton Manors after leaving the Legal Aid Service of Broward County.

If an owner’s attorney can present a professional loan audit during mediation, it can convince a lender “how bad a [loan] they have and how bad it’ll be if they proceed with the foreclosure,” Castrataro said.

But too often borrowers pay for an audit before seeking legal advice, he said.

“They come in with these audits … and believe this is the Holy Grail that will save them. We sit them down and tell them the case is still pretty bad –– maybe because they have insufficient income or they even contributed to providing fraudulent documents,” Castrataro said.

“And sometimes the audits are appropriate as part of a well-planned litigation strategy, not just to get information on their loan.”

Terry Sheridan can be reached at (954) 468-2614.

______________________

The Issue

With no sign of an abatement in mortgage fraud or foreclosures, companies that bill themselves as loan detectives have begun marketing a forensic analysis of mortgages. Their intent is to find fraud or improper handling of the loan in an effort to delay or stop foreclosures.

Here’s what you should know about them:
The state does not license or regulate the companies.
No upfront fees can be charged to help prevent foreclosures.
Some firms operate in conjunction with loan modification companies and have been prosecuted for seeking payment first.